Israel, Exams, and Other Sh*t
FOLLOWING THE CALIFORNIA EXIT EXAM
To begin with, though I am often (actually,mostly) critical of the Los Angeles Times, it can - at times (no pun) - say the right thing...or at least allow others to do so when "appropriate."
Such is the case with the Exit exams. Mercifully, the Times' editorial staff chose to run an op-ed on the fact that the Exit exams were working and, also - for a change - backed up a correct end with the appropriate means (in other words, objectivity that in any other section would seem surprisingly out of place). Enter former Los Angeles major Richard Riordan into the mix with a somewhat more subjective pro-Exit Exam op-ed of his own, and one has a newspaper that has reformed appropriately on at least one issue. Riordan's persuasive op-ed - which utilizes Thomas Friedman's The World Is Flat, can be found here.
CIVILIAN DEATHS IN THE MIDEAST, SAN FRANCISCO STYLE
In response to the July 22 Opinion article "'Civilian casualty'? That's a gray area," angry San Franciscoan Evan Elliot writes:
"Dershowitz writes: 'The Israeli army has given well-publicized notice to civilians to leave those areas of southern Lebanon that have been turned into war zones. Those who voluntarily remain behind have become complicit.' That sounds fair enough, but there's a problem: Israel has blocked many roads in all directions, so thousands of civilians cannot leave southern Lebanon. So much for Israel trying to minimize the deaths of innocents."
Evan, I do not think you have done your research. You acknowledge the claim that Israel has been trying to minimize civilian deaths, yet you've ignored the thousands of firsthand reports from all categories of sources that Hezbollah encourages death; you seem to believe that failing to prevent death is worse than purposely causing it. At least Israel tries to minimize deaths, but it is a feat near impossible when the enemy (in this case, Hezbollah) will do anything to put civilians into the line of fire so that it could hide within the mesh of said civilians.
Do us all real Americans a favor: go back to pre-Dec. 1941 America; you might just fit right in!
THE RIGHT WORD AT THE PERFECT TIME
It seems that someone used the Times for personal purposes. Sylvan Collin wasted no breath in bashing in Bush as best she could (in retaliation for Bush saying "shit") with the following:
"Shame on The Times for applauding Bush's use of profanity. The president is not just another guy whose frustration justifies his use of profanity. The president's language in public should be carefully controlled and should reflect the dignity inherent in his high office.
Another reason for condemning rather than applauding Bush is that he does not practice what he preaches. His administration's official policy is that the use of obscenities is immoral and offensive. The FCC, which is controlled by Bush appointees, invokes stiff fines on U.S. radio and TV stations that broadcast the s-word used by the president. His use of that word demonstrates his hypocrisy."
Shame on you, Sylvan! It is in your second paragraph that I find your hypocrisy. Remember, this was small talk. D'you know that phrase? Or are you resistant to the fact that perhaps some people might not talk formally all the time when expected? Don't forget, radio and TV stations are intentionally open to the public; small talk is supposed to be private...right?
Bush is a man with responsibilities. He's not a celebrity.
Oh, and speaking of which, he was the only man who acted responsibly at the G8, being the only leader with a clear stance against the terroristic Hezbollah.
Hey, Sylvan and Evan - take your anti-Israel shit somewhere else - some place private!
- Sentientity
To begin with, though I am often (actually,mostly) critical of the Los Angeles Times, it can - at times (no pun) - say the right thing...or at least allow others to do so when "appropriate."
Such is the case with the Exit exams. Mercifully, the Times' editorial staff chose to run an op-ed on the fact that the Exit exams were working and, also - for a change - backed up a correct end with the appropriate means (in other words, objectivity that in any other section would seem surprisingly out of place). Enter former Los Angeles major Richard Riordan into the mix with a somewhat more subjective pro-Exit Exam op-ed of his own, and one has a newspaper that has reformed appropriately on at least one issue. Riordan's persuasive op-ed - which utilizes Thomas Friedman's The World Is Flat, can be found here.
CIVILIAN DEATHS IN THE MIDEAST, SAN FRANCISCO STYLE
In response to the July 22 Opinion article "'Civilian casualty'? That's a gray area," angry San Franciscoan Evan Elliot writes:
"Dershowitz writes: 'The Israeli army has given well-publicized notice to civilians to leave those areas of southern Lebanon that have been turned into war zones. Those who voluntarily remain behind have become complicit.' That sounds fair enough, but there's a problem: Israel has blocked many roads in all directions, so thousands of civilians cannot leave southern Lebanon. So much for Israel trying to minimize the deaths of innocents."
Evan, I do not think you have done your research. You acknowledge the claim that Israel has been trying to minimize civilian deaths, yet you've ignored the thousands of firsthand reports from all categories of sources that Hezbollah encourages death; you seem to believe that failing to prevent death is worse than purposely causing it. At least Israel tries to minimize deaths, but it is a feat near impossible when the enemy (in this case, Hezbollah) will do anything to put civilians into the line of fire so that it could hide within the mesh of said civilians.
Do us all real Americans a favor: go back to pre-Dec. 1941 America; you might just fit right in!
THE RIGHT WORD AT THE PERFECT TIME
It seems that someone used the Times for personal purposes. Sylvan Collin wasted no breath in bashing in Bush as best she could (in retaliation for Bush saying "shit") with the following:
"Shame on The Times for applauding Bush's use of profanity. The president is not just another guy whose frustration justifies his use of profanity. The president's language in public should be carefully controlled and should reflect the dignity inherent in his high office.
Another reason for condemning rather than applauding Bush is that he does not practice what he preaches. His administration's official policy is that the use of obscenities is immoral and offensive. The FCC, which is controlled by Bush appointees, invokes stiff fines on U.S. radio and TV stations that broadcast the s-word used by the president. His use of that word demonstrates his hypocrisy."
Shame on you, Sylvan! It is in your second paragraph that I find your hypocrisy. Remember, this was small talk. D'you know that phrase? Or are you resistant to the fact that perhaps some people might not talk formally all the time when expected? Don't forget, radio and TV stations are intentionally open to the public; small talk is supposed to be private...right?
Bush is a man with responsibilities. He's not a celebrity.
Oh, and speaking of which, he was the only man who acted responsibly at the G8, being the only leader with a clear stance against the terroristic Hezbollah.
Hey, Sylvan and Evan - take your anti-Israel shit somewhere else - some place private!
- Sentientity
posted by Geewhiz at 3:17 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home